holonovel

Note Management

manage_note

Destructive

Store, list, and remove Novel-scoped scratch notes for game_master, player, or shared reuse. Mutations persist to the Novel and are audited; undo with manage_history, not for durable lore.

Instructions

Manage Novel-scoped scratch notes, badge-scoped to game_master (default), player, or shared. Mutating actions persist to the Novel and are audited; read-only actions do not mutate state. Revert the most recent mutation with manage_history (action: undo). set's badge_scope defaults to game_master. Use when: storing scratch state the caller will reuse. Do NOT use when: recording durable world facts — use manage_lore (action: set).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	No	The note key (set/remove/set_server/remove_server).
`action`	Yes	set, remove, list, set_server, remove_server, or list_server.
`content`	No	The note content (set/set_server).
`badge_scope`	No	game_master, player, or shared (set).
`narrative_tag`	No	Optional narrative tag (set_server).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	No	Human-readable text envelope mirroring the structured result (REQ-001, REQ-548a).
`status`	Yes	Machine-readable result status: OK, NEED_INPUT, WARNING, PARTIAL, or an error category (REQ-002, REQ-548c).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.0.3Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Adds real context beyond the annotations: mutations persist to the Novel and are audited, reads do not mutate state, and the most recent mutation is undoable via manage_history. The destructive/audited/reversible profile is consistent with destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, though it doesn't spell out precisely what a remove destroys or permission requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Dense but front-loaded: identity and scope first, then mutation/audit semantics, then undo routing, then use/don't-use. Every clause carries information; no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a multi-action mutating tool with an output schema, annotations, and full schema coverage, the description supplies the missing decision layer (scratch vs. lore, undo path, defaults). Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns an extra point by disclosing a behavior the schema does not — that set's badge_scope defaults to game_master — which materially affects correct invocation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: Novel-scoped scratch notes, badge-scoped to game_master/player/shared. It explicitly differentiates itself from the closest sibling (manage_lore) by naming the boundary between scratch state and durable world facts.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do NOT use when' clauses, names the alternative (manage_lore action: set) for durable facts, and routes the undo path to manage_history (action: undo). An agent has everything needed to choose between this and its alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.